Title I School Wide Plan for

Powder Springs Elementary School

Written/Revised during the

School Year:

2011-2012

For Implementation during the

School Year:

2011-2012

Submitted June 23, 2011

Revised September 16, 2011

Principal’s Signature

Title I School Wide Plan
Planning Committee Members for: Title I School Wide Plan
Date of Committee Meeting: / School Year 2010-2011
Name of School POWDER SPRINGS ELEMENTARY
NAME / POSITION/ROLE/PARENT / SIGNATURE
Darlene Mitchell / Principal
Pat Adair / Assistant Principal
Barry Frazier / Counselor
Lisa Morgan / Kindergarten Teacher
Patty Schatz / First Grade Teacher
Debbie Rainer / Second Grade Teacher
Mitzi Burge / Third Grade Teacher
Tanja Smith / Fourth Grade Teacher
Janis Rone / Fifth Grade Teacher
Dr. Nadine Lawrence-Guthrie / Speech Language Pathologist
Nicole McCoy / Special Education Teacher
Latonya Greer / Media Specialist
John McKearney / Specialist
Dr. Shanell Butler / Math Coach
Cathy White-Trout / Literacy Coach
Dr. Sakinah Dantzler / EIP Teacher/Reading Recovery
Tim Briggs / Custodian
Tina Stewart / Paraprofessional
Dallas Picou / Consultant

Table of Contents

Pages

1.  Comprehensive Needs Assessment 5

A.  Participation of Individuals 5

B.  Instruments, Procedures, or Processes 5

C.  The Needs of Homeless, Neglected, and Migrant Children 6

D.  Current Achievement Data 6

E.  Information about All Students 8

F.  Data, Conclusions 8

G.  Measurable Goals/Benchmarks 9

2.  School Wide Reform Strategies That Are Scientifically Researched 10

A.  School Wide Reform Strategies That Provide Opportunities For All Children 10

B.  Effective Means of Raising Student Achievement 10

C.  Effective Instructional Methods That Increase Learning Time 12

D.  Address the Needs of All Children 12

3.  Instruction by Highly Qualified Professional Staff 13

A.  Strategies to Attract Highly Qualified Teachers 13

B.  School Status of Highly Qualified Teachers 14

4.  Professional Development For Staff 14

A.  Include Teachers, Principals, Paraprofessionals, and Others 14

B.  Aligned Professional Development with the State’s Academic Content 14

C.  Professional Development Activities that Address the Root Causes 14

D.  Include Teachers in Professional Development Activities Regarding 15

the Use of Academic Assessments

E.  School Yearly Professional Development Schedule 15

5.  Strategies to Increase Parental Involvement 17

A.  Involved Parents in the Planning of the Comprehensive School Wide Program 17

B.  Parent Involvement Policy and Parent Compact 18

6.  Plans for Assisting Preschool Children in the Transition From Early Childhood Programs 18

and/or Students Entering Middle School or High School

7.  Measures to Include Teachers in the Decisions Regarding the Use of Assessment 19

8.  Coordination and Integration of Federal, State, and Local Services and Programs 19

A.  List of State and Local Educational Agency Programs and Other Federal 19

Programs That Will Be Included

B.  Description of How Resources from Title I and Other Sources will be Used 20

C.  Plan Developed in Coordination with Other Programs 20

9.  Activities to Ensure that Students who Experience Difficulty Mastering

Standards Shall be Provided with Effective, Timely Assistance 21

A.  Measures to Ensure that Students’ Difficulties are Identified on a Timely Basis 21

B.  Periodic Training for Teachers in the Identification of Difficulties 21

C.  Teacher-Parent Conferences 22

10.  Description of How Individual Student Assessment Results Will Be Provided to Parents 22

11.  Provisions for the Collection and Disaggregation of Data 23

12.  Provisions to Ensure the Disaggregated Assessment Results are Valid and

Reliable 24

13.  Provisions for Public Reporting of Disaggregated Data 24

14.  Plan Developed During a One-Year Period 24

15.  Plan Developed with the Involvement of the Community to be Served 25

16.  Plan Available to the LEA, Parents, and the Public 25

17.  Plan Translated 25

18.  Plan is Subject to the School Improvement Provisions of Section 1116 25

19.  APPENDIX A 26

20.  APPENDIX B 27

21.  APPENDIX C 29


1. Comprehensive Needs Assessment

A. Participation of Individuals

Powder Springs Elementary School developed our school wide plan over a one year period with participation of individuals who will carry out the comprehensive school wide program. The following persons participated in the plan development:

Name Title

Darlene Mitchell Principal

Pat Adair Assistant Principal

Michelle Curry Assistant Principal

Dr. Chemara Jackson Counselor

Barry Frazier Counselor

Lisa Morgan Kindergarten Teacher

Patty Schatz First Grade Teacher

Debbie Morris Second Grade Teacher

Mitzi Burge Third Grade Teacher

Tanja Smith Fourth Grade Teacher

Janis Rone Fifth Grade Teacher

Dr. Nadine Lawrence-Guthrie Speech Pathologist

Nicole McCoy Special Student Services

Latonya Greer Media Specialist

John McKearny Specialist

Dr. Shanell Butler Parent Liaison/Math Coach

Cathy White-Trout EIP/Literacy Coach

Dr. Sakinah Dantzler Early Intervention Program Teacher

Tim Briggs Head Custodian

Tina Stewart Paraprofessional

Dallas Picou Consultant

This committee is made up of the Powder Springs school administration, literacy coaches, representatives from each grade level, special student services such as special education and early interventions specialists, other vital staff members, as well as the parent liaison and parent/PTA members.

B. Instruments, Procedures, or Processes

We have used the following instruments, procedures or processes to obtain this information the School Strategic Plan (SSP), Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) Data, Criterion-Referenced Competency Tests (CRCT), Iowa Test of Basic Skills (ITBS), Developmental Reading Assessment (DRA), Georgia Writing assessments for grades 3 and 5, ACCESS for English Language Learners (ELL), County Benchmark Assessments and Individual Math Inventories (IMI’s).

C. & D. The Needs of Homeless, Neglected, and Migrant Children & Current Achievement Data

Student demographics, as shown in Figure 1, have remained relatively unchanged through the past four years. The percent of students in all subgroups have remained constant. Although enrollment has increased, the racial and subgroup categories have increased with the same ratio. In addition to the subgroups listed, the needs of migrant, homeless, neglected and delinquent children have also been addressed within these subgroups by the school social worker, teachers, math and literacy coaches, counselors, and administration.

Figure 1 : Demographics in AYP Grades

Students in AYP Grades and Subgroups (as defined by NCLB)
Year / Total Students / Black / % / Hispanic* / % / White / % / Multi-Racial* / %
2011 / 490 / 345 / 70 / 38 / 8 / 75 / 15 / 23 / 5
2010 / 533 / 378 / 71 / 41 / 8 / 85 / 16 / 24 / 5
2009 / 538 / 378 / 70 / 38 / 7 / 91 / 17 / 26 / 5
2008 / 468 / 308 / 66 / 47 / 10 / 91 / 19 / 16 / 3
Year / Total Students / SWD / % / ELL* / % / Economic Disadvantaged / %
2011 / 490 / 81 / 17 / 29 / 6 / 299 / 61
2010 / 533 / 73 / 14 / 26 / 5 / 304 / 57
2009 / 538 / 79 / 15 / 24 / 4 / 298 / 55
2008 / 468 / 70 / 15 / 18 / 4 / 255 / 54

Note: *These subgroups have too few students to apply to NCLB’s AYP calculations.

On the 2010-2011 CRCT 62.5% of our students with disabilities met or exceeded standards in the area of Reading/English Language Arts making AYP through the use of safe harbor guidelines. In that same student group Mathematics CRCT showed that 55.4% of the students meeting and or exceeding standards which met AYP using safe harbor guidelines as well. Currently at Powder Springs Elementary we have students being served in this student group with the following exceptionalities: Learning Disabled, Behavior Disordered, and Other Health Impaired.

At Powder Springs Elementary, the percentage of all students meeting and exceeding the GA CRCT in Reading/English Language Arts was 87.7%. The largest gap (27.3%) between student groups as defined in the Elementary Secondary Education Act of 1965 (ESEA) formally known as No Child Left Behind (NCLB) federal legislation was the SWD (students with disabilities) mentioned above and the White student group which showed a percentage of 89.8% meeting and exceeding. Next, it was noted that an achievement gap of 29.8 percentage points in math occurred between white and SWD students, 85.2% and 55.4%, respectively.

Figure 2a: Improvement of student performance baseline data on national tests.

Indicators
2006-07 / 2007-08 / 2008-09 / 2009-10
n / % / n / % / n / % / n / %
Students meeting or exceeding the national average on the composite ITBS in grade 3 / 78 / 54.5% / 84 / 56.4% / 72 / 51.80% / 68 / 52.00%
Students meeting or exceeding the national average on the composite ITBS in grade 5 / 78 / 50.3% / 76 / 53.1% / 79 / 48.47% / 77 / 53.00%

As show in Figure 2a, baseline data was set during the years of 2006-2007 through 2009-2010. For the most part, better than 50% of students were above the national average on the ITBS in both third and fifth grade with the exception of fifth graders in 2008-2009.

Figure 2b: Improvement of student performance results data on national tests.

As shown in Figure 2b, students in third grade fell short of target goals on the composite score in 2009-2010 by 3.00%. However, fifth graders exceeded the target by 1.30% on the composite score of the Iowa Test of Basic Skills (ITBS).

Figure 2c: Improvement of student performance targets on national tests.

Figure 2c shows the projected targets for the current and next year’s ITBS tests. This information is in agreement with our School Strategic Plan Targets.

E. Information about All Students

We have reflected current achievement data that will help the school understand the subjects and skills in which teaching and learning need to be improved. For example, our SWD subgroup shows the greatest achievement gap. Our results have show consistent gains in math and slower gains in reading for this subgroup. We will continue to focus on improving achievement for all students, while increasing efforts to decrease the achievement gap for this subgroup.

The data has helped us reach conclusions regarding student achievement. The major strength we found in our program was consistent gains by all students in math. The major needs we discovered were a need for better integration of Writing, Science and Social Studies curriculum and consistent gains in reading for students with disabilities. Our school will expand the usage of FASTT Math, Go Solve, Fraction Nation, Study Island, Scholastic Math Inventory (SMI), Scholastic Reading Inventory (SRI), Guided Reading, and Guided Math. The specific academic needs of students that are being addressed in the school-wide program will be addressed by teachers through regular collaboration and data meetings with the math and literacy coaches. Our consistent implementation will continue to show improvement for all students and subgroups.

F. Data Conclusions

In an effort to maximize results, Powder Springs Elementary has identified actions, strategies, and interventions to be implemented by adults. Our staff will use Guided Math and Guided Reading instruction daily, while integrating Science and Social Studies curriculum. They will have a 180 minute literacy block with 90 minutes of math instruction daily. This will be implemented by teachers and monitored by administrators, math and literacy coaches. Training will be provided for teachers during pre-planning.

Implementation will also be monitored through observations, focus walks, and team collaborative planning minutes. Teachers will work with students on FASTT Math, GO Solve, Fraction Nation, Scholastic Reading Inventory (SRI), Scholastic Math Inventory (SMI), Accelerated Reader (AR), and Study Island to improve reading comprehension, math fluency, and problem solving. Support will be provided through Technology, local and county Literacy Coaches, and local and county Math Coaches. Monitoring will take place through monthly reports generated by teachers, team minutes, and local literacy and math coaches.

Staff will facilitate curriculum nights with guidance from the parent facilitator for parents which will allow students to demonstrate how they learn math and reading. We will continue bi-monthly data team meetings to analyze reading and math data to adjust and differentiate student instruction. Teachers will receive training initiated by local math and reading coaches and this activity will be monitored by monthly data minutes.

As part of the teachers grade-level planning, teams will meet monthly to collaborate and adjust data graphs based on math and reading achievement. Pre-Post Test Data will also be monitored each quarter. Grade level administrators will monitor the process through the team collaborative planning minutes. In addition, Teacher Tutors will plan and implement best practice strategies to increase student achievement in math and reading. The training for this process will take place in the extended day planning by grade level administrators.

G. Measureable Goals/Benchmarks

Student Achievement Goals

Our long-range student achievement goals are for students to perform at or above grade level in Reading and Math. After analyzing the data from the CRCT scores from 2010 and the Annual Measureable Objective (AMO), which continues to increase annually, we determined that continual improvement in these areas a priority. We established the following measurable goals to address needs for student learning:

Ø  Students will improve student achievement in math by focusing on the following domains at each grade level: 1st—money, numbers and operations; 2nd—numbers and operations; 3rd—measurement, numbers and operations; 4th—geometry, numbers and operations; and 5th—fractions, numbers and operations.

Ø  Students will improve student achievement in reading by focusing on comprehension and phonics in grades K-2 and reading comprehension and grammar in grades 3-5.

School Performance Goals

Our long-range school performance goal is: The teachers will collaborate bi-monthly to monitor student progress in math and reading and adjust instruction accordingly to improve student achievement. The math and reading coaches will facilitate the analyzing of student data to improve instruction across grade levels.


2. School-Wide Reform Strategies That Are Scientifically Researched

A. School-Wide Reform Strategies That Provide Opportunities For All Children

At Powder Springs Elementary (PSE), our primary goal is student achievement. This goal is accomplished through a rigorous curriculum, designed to meet the individual needs of all learners. We believe in teaching to the whole of the child. Multiple opportunities are provided each day to assist learners in meeting and exceeding grade level expectations. We strive to build positive relationships with students and we encourage this process by promoting positive interactions. Furthermore, we seek to assist students in becoming well rounded individuals. We address the needs of all our students by providing multiple modalities of learning key skills and concepts. We expect the best from our students and we set high standards. We use researched based methods proven to bolster student achievement. Based on our CRCT results and the annual AMO increase to meet AYP, we are continually concerned about our students’ achievement in math and reading, especially in our SWD subgroup.